新疆医科大学学报
新疆醫科大學學報
신강의과대학학보
JOURNAL OF XINJIANG MEDICAL UNIVERSITY
2015年
3期
314-316
,共3页
孙晓宏%韩峰%罗洞波%吕红博%斯坎达尔·阿不力孜
孫曉宏%韓峰%囉洞波%呂紅博%斯坎達爾·阿不力孜
손효굉%한봉%라동파%려홍박%사감체이·아불력자
食管癌%围手术期%腹腔镜
食管癌%圍手術期%腹腔鏡
식관암%위수술기%복강경
esophageal cancer%peri-operation%laparoscope
目的:对比开胸联合腹腔镜手术与传统开放手术2种术式治疗食管癌的围手术期效果。方法选择2012年1月-2014年6月在新疆医科大学附属肿瘤医院胸外科接受手术治疗的食管癌患者78例,其中传统开放手术41例,开胸联合腹腔镜手术37例,比较2种手术方式的手术操作时间、术中失血量、淋巴结清扫个数、术后ICU 留观时间、术后住院天数、术后感染发生率以及术后吻合口瘘发生率方面的差异。结果开胸联合腹腔镜组术中出血量为(244.03±44.33)mL,传统开放组为(322.50±51.55)mL,两组比较差异有统计学意义(t =6.296,P=0.000);开胸联合腹腔镜组术后肺部感染发生率为10.8%(4/37),传统开放组为31.7%(13/41),两组比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.983,P =0.026);开胸联合腹腔镜组术后术区感染发生率为5.4%(2/37),传统开放组为22.0%(9/41),两组比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.395,P =0.036);开胸联合腹腔镜组术后 ICU 留观时间为(1.58±1.53)d,传统开放组为(2.57±1.70)d,两组比较差异有统计学意义(t =2.842,P =0.006);开胸联合腹腔镜组术后住院天数为(15.69±4.73)d,传统开放组为(18.38±6.50)d,两 组 比 较 差 异有统计学意义(t =2.183,P =0.032)。结论开胸联合腹腔镜手术较传统开放手术对于食管癌患者具有更好的围手术期临床效果,术后恢复期更短,术后感染并发症更少。
目的:對比開胸聯閤腹腔鏡手術與傳統開放手術2種術式治療食管癌的圍手術期效果。方法選擇2012年1月-2014年6月在新疆醫科大學附屬腫瘤醫院胸外科接受手術治療的食管癌患者78例,其中傳統開放手術41例,開胸聯閤腹腔鏡手術37例,比較2種手術方式的手術操作時間、術中失血量、淋巴結清掃箇數、術後ICU 留觀時間、術後住院天數、術後感染髮生率以及術後吻閤口瘺髮生率方麵的差異。結果開胸聯閤腹腔鏡組術中齣血量為(244.03±44.33)mL,傳統開放組為(322.50±51.55)mL,兩組比較差異有統計學意義(t =6.296,P=0.000);開胸聯閤腹腔鏡組術後肺部感染髮生率為10.8%(4/37),傳統開放組為31.7%(13/41),兩組比較差異有統計學意義(χ2=4.983,P =0.026);開胸聯閤腹腔鏡組術後術區感染髮生率為5.4%(2/37),傳統開放組為22.0%(9/41),兩組比較差異有統計學意義(χ2=4.395,P =0.036);開胸聯閤腹腔鏡組術後 ICU 留觀時間為(1.58±1.53)d,傳統開放組為(2.57±1.70)d,兩組比較差異有統計學意義(t =2.842,P =0.006);開胸聯閤腹腔鏡組術後住院天數為(15.69±4.73)d,傳統開放組為(18.38±6.50)d,兩 組 比 較 差 異有統計學意義(t =2.183,P =0.032)。結論開胸聯閤腹腔鏡手術較傳統開放手術對于食管癌患者具有更好的圍手術期臨床效果,術後恢複期更短,術後感染併髮癥更少。
목적:대비개흉연합복강경수술여전통개방수술2충술식치료식관암적위수술기효과。방법선택2012년1월-2014년6월재신강의과대학부속종류의원흉외과접수수술치료적식관암환자78례,기중전통개방수술41례,개흉연합복강경수술37례,비교2충수술방식적수술조작시간、술중실혈량、림파결청소개수、술후ICU 류관시간、술후주원천수、술후감염발생솔이급술후문합구루발생솔방면적차이。결과개흉연합복강경조술중출혈량위(244.03±44.33)mL,전통개방조위(322.50±51.55)mL,량조비교차이유통계학의의(t =6.296,P=0.000);개흉연합복강경조술후폐부감염발생솔위10.8%(4/37),전통개방조위31.7%(13/41),량조비교차이유통계학의의(χ2=4.983,P =0.026);개흉연합복강경조술후술구감염발생솔위5.4%(2/37),전통개방조위22.0%(9/41),량조비교차이유통계학의의(χ2=4.395,P =0.036);개흉연합복강경조술후 ICU 류관시간위(1.58±1.53)d,전통개방조위(2.57±1.70)d,량조비교차이유통계학의의(t =2.842,P =0.006);개흉연합복강경조술후주원천수위(15.69±4.73)d,전통개방조위(18.38±6.50)d,량 조 비 교 차 이유통계학의의(t =2.183,P =0.032)。결론개흉연합복강경수술교전통개방수술대우식관암환자구유경호적위수술기림상효과,술후회복기경단,술후감염병발증경소。
Objective To compare peri-operational outcomes between laparoscopic and traditional approach for esophageal cancer surgical treatment.Methods 78 cases of esophageal cancer patients in Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University between Janurary 2012 to June 2014 were divided into two different groups.There were 41 cases in laparoscopic group and 37 cases in another traditional group.Items compared between these two different groups were operational duration,volume of blood losing,number of lymph node dissected,post-operational days of ICU staying,post-operational days of hospital staying, post-operative infectious incidence rate and incidence rate of anastomosis leakage.Results The volume of blood losing in laparoscopic group and traditional group were (244.03 ± 44.33 )mL and (322.50 ± 51.55)mL respectively,there was significant differences between two roups (t = 6.296,P =0.000).The incidence rate of lung infection in laparoscopic group and traditional group were 10.8%(4/37)and 31.7%(13/41),respectively,with significant differences (χ2 =4.983,P =0.026).The incidence rate of opera-tional region infection in laparoscopic group and traditional group were 5.4%(2/37)and 22.0%(9/41)re-spectively,with significant differences (χ2 =4.395,P =0.036).The post-operational days of ICU staying and hospital staying in laparoscopic group and traditional group were (1.58±1.53)d ,(15.69±4.73)d and (2.57±1.70)d,(18.38±6.50)d,respectively,with significant differences (t =2.842,2.183,P =0.006, 0.032).Conclusion The outcome in laparoscopic group is better than that in traditional group,patients in laparoscopic group may get an earlier discharge from hospital and less infectious complications than those in traditional group.